NW Natural pushes back on bill that would require notifying customers about use of hydrogen
A bill in the Oregon Legislature would require gas utility notification when hydrogen is blended with natural gas for residential customers. (Photo by)
Last summer, a Democratic state senator heard from hundreds of constituents in southeast Portland who were concerned about NW Natural secretly supplying residents with natural gas blended with small amounts of hydrogen.
Sen. Khanh Pham of Portland told the Senate Committee on Energy and Environment at a hearing Monday that they weren't just concerned that NW Natural didn't notify them, but that it wasn't required to inform the state's Public Utility Commission either. In response, Pham is now sponsoring Senate Bill 685 to require utilities to notify customers and the commission that it's going to supply residences with hydrogen-blended natural gas.
'Every gas pipeline has risks. The goal is that when hydrogen gas is introduced into Oregonians' homes, there should be a minimum public notice,' Pham, a member of the committee, told the senators.
The bill, based on regulations in Washington state, would also require utilities to notify the commission of blend ratios and potential safety and health risks, and inform local fire and health departments about their plans.
Two years ago, NW Natural scrapped hydrogen blending plans in Eugene due to public outcry over lack of transparency.
A growing body of research shows that burning natural gas in homes is unhealthy, and although there is less research on the risks of burning hydrogen-blended natural gas in homes, studies show that burning these blends releases nitrogen oxides, which can cause respiratory illnesses.
Natural gas also brings environmental concerns. It is almost entirely methane, a potent greenhouse gas. When burned, it releases carbon dioxide, another greenhouse gas warming the planet.
Hydrogen does not emit greenhouse gases, but the hydrogen NW Natural is making to blend into its natural gas is created through a controversial and energy-intensive process that requires heating methane to capture the hydrogen molecules in it. NW Natural, which opposes Senate Bill 685, maintains that blending hydrogen with natural gas will help lower harmful emissions from burning natural gas alone.
During the hearing, company representatives said hydrogen is safe to burn in homes and that giving customers and the commission advance notification would be onerous, expensive and impede the company's climate goals.
'Policies that add unnecessary expense and complication to reducing emissions and developing clean energy resources do not serve Oregonians,' Mary Moerlins, NW Natural's environmental policy director. 'Instead, they cost our customers additional time and money. Oregon should not add additional requirements that don't improve safety at a time of extreme pressure on utility rates.'
Environmentalists argue that hydrogen — which can be energy intensive to make and only clean if it's derived from water and the energy used to make it is sourced from renewables — should be used to power big ships, trains and manufacturing facilities, not homes.
Studies from the International Renewable Energy Agency have found that replacing 20% of natural gas with hydrogen only reduces emissions from natural gas by up to 7%. And each ton of emissions cut from blending hydrogen with natural gas costs three times as much as the next most expensive method of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, which is to draw carbon from the atmosphere using large machines, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency.
The better solution, many environmentalists say, is to hasten a transition to electric heating and cooking infrastructure in homes and away from burning fossil fuels like natural gas.
But a 7% reduction is meaningful to the company's efforts to meet state decarbonization targets, according to Chris Kroeker, decarbonization director at NW Natural. He told the committee it would equate to a reduction of 400,000 tons of carbon dioxide emissions per year, equivalent to taking 85,000 gas-powered cars off the road every year.
Kroeker said the company does not typically alert customers about gas blending because 'there's no significant impact on downstream equipment, it increases costs for customers to do so, and it could also cause messaging fatigue.'
Pham and other supporters of the bill question that reasoning. Carra Sahler, director of the Green Energy Institute at Lewis & Clark Law School, said customers deserve to know what they are paying for.
'The monopoly utility is now using ratepayer dollars for this project, but does not need to alert anyone if it increases the amount of hydrogen it blends,' she said.
Pham told the committee that before introducing the legislation she toured the NW natural facility where the hydrogen blending is taking place, and met with the Portland-based Renewable Hydrogen Alliance and carpenter, electrician and ironworker unions to understand their concerns.
'As a NW Natural customer, I know that you send notices in the mail, and I imagine that you could probably include a notice in the mail,' Pham said.
Methane gas extracted from the earth is made of carbon and hydrogen molecules. The hydrogen NW Natural is making – 'turquoise hydrogen' – is created when that methane is heated to temperatures so high that the carbon and hydrogen molecules split from one another. This process is called 'methane pyrolysis.' NW Natural is heating methane, capturing the hydrogen and blending it into natural gas. They're also using some of the hydrogen as energy to heat more methane to create more hydrogen. And they are capturing the carbon and using it to make products like asphalt.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
32 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Senate Republicans ready vote on tax bill, still awaiting its final cost
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Republican Senator John Kennedy spoke with reporters after departing a Senate Republicans luncheon on Friday. There is still no final fiscal breakdown, known as a score, from either the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office or the Joint Committee on Taxation on the latest version of Trump's spending package. Kent Nishimura/NYT Advertisement Many of the changes reflect deals cut with individual Republicans who were at risk of voting against the bill and other, more mechanical rewrites to their cuts on Medicaid, energy tax credits and food stamps. Those updates will allow Republicans to try to advance the bill using a fast-track budget process in the Senate without any Democratic support. The revisions, taken together, could add or subtract to the overall costs of the package, but Republicans may not know precisely by how much when they hold their first vote this weekend. There is still no final fiscal breakdown, known as a score, from either the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office or the Joint Committee on Taxation, which advises lawmakers on the budget implication of their legislative agenda. Advertisement Only the joint committee has rendered a partial verdict, having studied just the tax components in the Senate's earlier, unrevised proposal. Computed in the traditional way, analysts found it would cost $4.2 trillion over the next decade. Otherwise, the two congressional budget watchdogs have not been able to offer more comprehensive projections about the sprawling bill, or the effects of their proposal on the broader economy. Studying the House version of the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which passed in late May, they determined it would add more than $3 trillion to the debt within the next decade, even after accounting for potential economic growth. Economists across the political spectrum have come to similar conclusions about the package and its price, drawing sharp rebukes from Trump and his aides. The White House continues to insist that the bill will supercharge economic growth, and when combined with the president's other policies, generate as much as $11 trillion in deficit reduction. Senator Josh Hawley talked to reporters at the Capitol on Saturday. After releasing a 940-page version of their sprawling domestic policy bill overnight, Senate Republicans were trying to find enough votes to pass it. TIERNEY L. CROSS/NYT Nor have congressional analysts determined the ways in which the Senate's new vision would affect families' finances across different income brackets. Earlier reports about the House tax legislation projected that the bill would fall hardest on the poor, who would see cuts to federal aid, while reserving the greatest financial benefits for the rich. For now, the best estimates for the Senate legislation are either outdated or preliminary, though they suggest the version winding through the chamber may carry a similar fiscal burden or turn out to be even more expensive. In one analysis, released earlier this week, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget projected that the Senate proposal could add as much as $4.2 trillion to the debt by 2034, after accounting for expected changes to the bill. Marc Goldwein, the senior vice president of the deficit-reduction group, acknowledged the true cost was unclear because 'we don't have a score.' Advertisement The cost could rise because of the specific changes Republicans made overnight, some experts said. The revised measure now provisions $25 billion for rural hospitals affected by Republicans' proposed cuts to Medicaid, for example, as well as an increase in the cap on the state and local tax deduction demanded by lawmakers in the House. Senate majority leader John Thune with reporters as he returned to his office from the floor of the Senate on Friday. Kent Nishimura/NYT Martha Gimbel, a founder of the Budget Lab at Yale, pointed to those additions as she predicted that 'everything is moving in a more expensive direction.' But that, she added, is the problem. 'None of us have had time to sit down and figure this out,' she said. On Saturday, with some fiscal hawks in the Senate refusing to vote to open debate on the domestic policy bill until they receive an official tally of its costs, and Democrats signaling they plan to force a line-by-line reading of all 940 pages to protest it, it looked unlikely the Senate would begin voting on the substance of the legislation until Sunday at the earliest. This article originally appeared in .
Politico
42 minutes ago
- Politico
Senate nailbiter
Senate Republicans stepped up their attacks on U.S. solar and wind energy projects by quietly adding a provision to their megabill that would penalize future developments with a new tax. That new tax measure was tucked into the more than 900-page document released late Friday that also would sharply cut the tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act for solar and wind projects. Those cuts to the IRA credits were added after a late-stage push by President Donald Trump to crack down further on the incentives by requiring generation projects be placed in service by the end of 2027 to qualify. The new excise tax is another blow to the fastest-growing sources of power production in the United States, and would be a massive setback to the wind and solar energy industries since it would apply even to projects not receiving any credits. 'It's a kill shot. This new excise tax on wind and solar is designed to fully kill the industry,' said Adrian Deveny, founder and president of policy advisory firm Climate Vision, who helped craft the climate law as a former policy director for Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer. Analysts at the Rhodium Group said in an email the new tax would push up the costs of wind and solar projects by 10 to 20 percent — on top of the cost increases from losing the credits. 'Combined with the likely onerous administrative reporting burden this provision puts in place, these cost increases will lead to even lower wind and solar installations. The impacts of this tax would also flow through to consumers in the form of higher electricity rates,' Rhodium said. The provision as written appears to add an additional tax for any wind and solar project placed into service after 2027 — when its eligibility for the investment and production tax credits ends — if a certain percentage of the value of the project's components are sourced from prohibited foreign entities, like China. It would apply to all projects that began construction after June 16 of this year. The language would require wind and solar projects, even those not receiving credits, to navigate complex and potentially unworkable requirements that prohibit sourcing from foreign entities of concern — a move designed to promote domestic production and crack down on Chinese materials. In keeping with GOP support for the fossil fuel industry, the updated bill creates a new production tax credit for metallurgical coal, which is used in steelmaking.
Politico
43 minutes ago
- Politico
Vance arrives
Senate Republicans stepped up their attacks on U.S. solar and wind energy projects by quietly adding a provision to their megabill that would penalize future developments with a new tax. That new tax measure was tucked into the more than 900-page document released late Friday that also would sharply cut the tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act for solar and wind projects. Those cuts to the IRA credits were added after a late-stage push by President Donald Trump to crack down further on the incentives by requiring generation projects be placed in service by the end of 2027 to qualify. The new excise tax is another blow to the fastest-growing sources of power production in the United States, and would be a massive setback to the wind and solar energy industries since it would apply even to projects not receiving any credits. 'It's a kill shot. This new excise tax on wind and solar is designed to fully kill the industry,' said Adrian Deveny, founder and president of policy advisory firm Climate Vision, who helped craft the climate law as a former policy director for Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer. Analysts at the Rhodium Group said in an email the new tax would push up the costs of wind and solar projects by 10 to 20 percent — on top of the cost increases from losing the credits. 'Combined with the likely onerous administrative reporting burden this provision puts in place, these cost increases will lead to even lower wind and solar installations. The impacts of this tax would also flow through to consumers in the form of higher electricity rates,' Rhodium said. The provision as written appears to add an additional tax for any wind and solar project placed into service after 2027 — when its eligibility for the investment and production tax credits ends — if a certain percentage of the value of the project's components are sourced from prohibited foreign entities, like China. It would apply to all projects that began construction after June 16 of this year. The language would require wind and solar projects, even those not receiving credits, to navigate complex and potentially unworkable requirements that prohibit sourcing from foreign entities of concern — a move designed to promote domestic production and crack down on Chinese materials. In keeping with GOP support for the fossil fuel industry, the updated bill creates a new production tax credit for metallurgical coal, which is used in steelmaking.
